


On the cultural and linguistic concept of the term 't'hy'la

by Mitsuhachi



Category: Star Trek: The Original Series
Genre: M/M
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2011-04-21
Updated: 2011-04-21
Packaged: 2017-10-18 10:58:15
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings
Chapters: 1
Words: 955
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/188231
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Mitsuhachi/pseuds/Mitsuhachi
Summary: <blockquote class="userstuff">
              <p>Epic nerdery. I regret nothing.</p>
            </blockquote>





	On the cultural and linguistic concept of the term 't'hy'la

**Author's Note:**

> I decided to essay it up here because a)it's making me nuts to constantly see this translation in fic, b)I am not, actually, arbiter of internet correctness, and c) insomnia makes me tl;dr.

Okay--first? I can completely understand being stupidly, it's ~~*destiny*~~ OTP about Kirk and Spock. I really can. (I...may or may not have gotten to the TOS episode 'Mirror, Mirror' and thought, "See? There's no universe where Spock doesn't love kirk. <3" I admit nothing.) But that doesn't mean you can legitimately just make up new definitions for a clearly defined term just because you want to. This idea that you can translate t'hy'la as "soulmate"? In the English sense? Makes no sense. Seriously. And I don't know why you'd want to! T'hy'la is a cool term! It's kind of a lovely concept as-is. <3

Let's consider: in general, when a foreign word has a very ambiguous translation that tells you, not that the other people are just being vague and you can think whatever you want, but that the *concepts* don't line up. That is, the foreign word is describing a concept in its culture that doesn't have an English equivalent. The given translations of t'hy'la are "friend, brother, lover". That's very likely only so ambiguous in terms of translation because it is describing the closest English equivalent to the same relationship at different times or in different cases.

Okay, so if we assume that it's describing a relationship that has no direct equivalent in our culture, what relationship is it describing? There are two ways figure it out: considering what is known of the linguistics, and considering what is known of the culture.

Linguistically, the Vulcan language usually makes words by smooshing a fairly small set of basic morphemes together, in such a way that the smaller concepts describe or revolve around the larger, new word's concept. T'hy'la has three of these morphemes. T' describes concepts of belonging, so it can function like 's in English (or on it's own like 'of') but more generally implies possession. The Vulcan Language Dictionary gives "belonging or connected to; derived or coming from; originating at or from; caused by; resulting from; away from; at a distance from" (the distance-related translations presumably containing the connotation of 'continuing to belong to or belong near and yet--'? I'm not sure). 'Hy' isn't given a direct definition, but the words where it's used revolve around martial concepts: k'hy, nerve pinch; t'hyvaj, a specific mirroring technique in martial arts; kali-k'hy, a martial art (like karate, not a specific technique). The only use I know that doesn't directly use this concept of aggression is k'lar'hy, curiosity--which given Vulcans I'm not sure should really count as an exception. 'La seems to denote affection, intimacy that is sometimes but not always sexual: vut'la, a thing looked forward to; puk'ai'la, an ally; k'la'sa, rape; and an archaic term B'hy'la, guest, "one who is a recipient of hospitality at the home or table of another" (if you've read the Odyssey, it's my impression that that's much more the idea of 'guest' here than the way we currently use it). So we are describing our t'hy'la as someone with whom we are involved intimately (possibly but not necessarily sexually so), in a martial context, compounded by a sense of mutual possession or belonging.

Culturally, Vulcan is a place that has (at least theoretically) set aside it's barbaric past--but the language developed in what was a very highly developed warrior society, much closer to, say, medieval Japan or ancient Greece than 20th century America. In every society I can think of that has a strong warrior-ideal and military focus (with the exception of medieval Europe, formally, and even there the idea had strong threads in the culture) the kinds of bonds that spring up between people who are risking their lives together and trusting the other to guard his back are linguistically recognized and honored. (I'm thinking of the Theban band right now as a particularly good example of a society that didn't feel that sexuality lessened that bond, but even us--have you watched a WW2 movie recently?)

So, our translations: 'friend' is probably a bit weak as we currently use it. Vulcan apparently doesn't have a straightforward term for 'friend' as we use it, because they don't waste their time on casual social interaction: there are people you interact with professionally, as political allies, as enemies, as family or bondmates--but nothing superficial. This isn't your friend who you just met at the bar, this is your best friend who you'd die for without a second thought. 'Brother' is almost certainly used in the sense of 'shield brother' or 'brother-in-arms' (there's another term, "sa'kai" that means a blood brother), someone who fights by your side. 'Lover' merely implies that the people who this relationship describes were--at least some of the time--involved sexually (T'hy'la doesn't seem to be used in the Victorian, flowers and lace sense of 'lover', rather the "asha-" morpheme is used in those kinds of situations).

All this implies to me that, on pre-reform Vulcan, there were groups of warriors who fought in pairs, reserved the greatest affection for each other, who were considered to belong--first and foremost, always--to each other, and who were frequently openly sexually involved. It also implies that society in general was fine this this, that it may even have been an honored class of relationship. This kind of relationship was enough of a thing for Vulcan to have a word for it, and continues enough in modern Vulcan society for the term not to have died out (as a lot of pre-reform words did, apparently). How fucking cool is that? Seriously, with that kind of consciously-chosen dedication, loyalty, and love for another person, I don't see any reason why you'd even want to bring in the concept of destiny.

 

...aaaaand, end nerdery.


End file.
